pybind11 VS PEGTL

I have a python module for which the logic is written in C++ and I use pybind11 to expose the objects and functions to Python.

Reading from Python requires a wrapper, using pybind11 this is fairly done.

That said, if you need to write a Python module in a compiled language, it's much easier and more fun these days to write in C++. pybind11 is extremely mature and even fun system to write Python objects in C++.

There will be specific technologies you used in your data pipelining: Parquet? Did you use Pandas to manipulate your data? Did you optimise some aspects with C++? If so did you use PyBind11 to integrate it?

git clone https://github.com/pybind/pybind11.git

I would say that pybind11 is precisely what you want here. If you don’t want to write the bindings yourself, you could try Tolc.

Pybind11 https://github.com/pybind/pybind11 is an easy way to expose c++ functions in python.

I think they should give up on Flutter for Web and just focus on mobile and desktop (and maybe extend use on Smart Watches, Smart TV, embedded instead). Too many people still remember Java Applets, google's GWT, Flash/Flex and how it ended. They are out of focus trying to support Web as well.

I had also higher expectation regarding Dart FFI - I think with their ffigen we are still only in ctypes like python bindings territory. Nowhere near something like pybind11 [0] for c++ bindings yet.

[0] https://github.com/pybind/pybind11

[1] https://github.com/mozilla/uniffi-rs

And how to do this in the best modern way instead of dealing with Pythons native and annoying 30 year old C API: https://github.com/pybind/pybind11

Some work on the C++ side will be required. There's https://github.com/pybind/pybind11 for example.

I like PEGTL

As a professional C++ programmer I feel a lot of the reasons C++ gets this response is because it's simply not "batteries included" like Go or Rust.

C++ is a very powerful, unopinionated language, that gives you a lot of freedom to attack your problem domain the way you best see fit.

If you're writing a networked application, don't use POSIX sockets, go and find a higher level library. If you're parsing complex text formats, don't iterate over buffers with char*'s, go pick up PEGTL[0]. If you're working on graphs, or need to properly index in-memory data, go pick up Boost[1][2]. If you need a GUI, go pick up Qt.

It's extremely common in C++, due to the lack of a universal package management solution, for people to try and "muddle through" and do shit themselves when it's far outside their core competency.

At one of my last employers, the core product was parsing JSON with std::regex, simply because they couldn't be bothered to integrate a JSON library.

[0] https://github.com/taocpp/PEGTL

[1] https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_76_0/libs/graph/

[2] https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_76_0/libs/multi_index/doc/i...

You are looking for Boost.Spirit (https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_76_0/libs/spirit/doc/x3/html/index.html) or PEGTL (https://github.com/taocpp/PEGTL)

I personally prefer to use parsing combinator libraries in C++, where the "grammar" is just part of normal C++ and directly integrate. Examples are Boost.Spirit, pegtl, or (my own) lexy.

In case you are still fighting with left-recursion you might be interested in this: https://github.com/taocpp/PEGTL/blob/master/src/example/pegtl/lua53.hpp

I've found https://github.com/taocpp/PEGTL to be easier to use than boost parser generators.